Research Background
In the contemporary period, with the development of the global commercial and business scenario, attributed mostly to phenomena like Globalisation, trade liberalisation and technological as well as infrastructural development, more and more businesses have been going global and exploring new markets as well as geographical regions. This in turn, has increased the level of competition among the businesses in all types of industries, thereby increasing the dynamics and complexities of the organizations (Tjan et al., 2012).
With time, thus, the organizational frameworks have also become more dynamic, complex and multilateral. Most of these organizations, especially the private organizations are mostly profit driven and are founded and run by entrepreneurs, with intention of personal monetary and non-monetary benefits maximisation. The top tiers of the business organizations, in a generalised framework, consisting of Directors and Executives, their remunerations and monetary benefits are crucial aspects in the commercial framework across the globe (Sigler & Carolina, 2011). However, the remunerations of the directors and the dynamics in the same, depend considerably on different factors, both internal and external to the concerned organizations with which these people are associated, and the level of remuneration of the directors, not only have implications on their level of motivation and intention to stay in the same, but also impacts different organizational aspects and operational frameworks (Kaplan & Minton, 2012).
Keeping this into consideration, the concerned research tries to analyse and interpret the relationship between the remuneration of the directors of commercial and business organizations and the profits as well as the share price dynamics of these organizations, especially emphasizing on the commercial and industrial sector of one of the dominant economies in the contemporary period, that is, the Australian economy (Huczynski et al., 2013).
As discussed in the above section, in the era of increasing commercial dynamics and competition as well as increased market activities of businesses, it is of immense importance to manage the operations of a company effectively and efficiently, in a comprehensive and inclusive manner. Much of these managing and decision-making aspects and responsibilities are bestowed to the managing bodies and directors of the companies, which in turn indicates towards the immensely crucial roles which these people play in the operational frameworks of the companies and also towards the power and level of influence of their decisions and activities on the profitability, prosperity and long-term sustainability of the organizations, in almost all types of industries, across the globe (Hahn &Lasfer, 2011).
The directors of the companies are either the entrepreneurs themselves or are those who are hired by the entrepreneurs to take decisions and manage the companies on their behalf (Foster, 2012). These people are usually highly skilled ones with considerable experience and efficiencies in their fields, due to remaining in the industries for long periods and a lot of the company’s profits, prospects, image and sustainability in the market depends on their insights, decisions and problem-solving as well as managing abilities, which make them immensely crucial assets and resources for the companies. Thus, to retain these resources and the benefits of this human capital, the companies design lucrative remuneration and financial benefits structures for these people (Frederick, 2011).
Literature Review
The remuneration structures of the executives and the directors of the business organizations, however, are dynamic and multilateral frameworks, which keep on changing with time as well as with the changes in the profitability, business expansion, operations and revenue generation of the companies. The payments are also done in different forms, like that of fixed salaries or variable dividends, depending upon the value of the profits and revenue generation as well as the share values of the companies. Often, the directors of the companies receive payments partially or considerably based on the share valuation of the companies or the net revenue generation or profits earned by the same. The level of the remunerations, received by these people, also play immensely crucial roles in motivating them or demotivating them as well as influence their level of loyalty and efforts as well as dedication which they put in, which in turn also reflects on the level of profit earned by the companies and on the overall reputation, brand image and sustainability of the same. Keeping this into consideration, the concerned research tries to focus on 20 different and reputed ASX listed companies, currently operating in the industrial sectors of the economy of Australia, to analyse the impacts (if any) of the remuneration of the directors of these companies on the level of profits and share values of the same (Burns, 2016).
- , including those of the
There remain considerable perceptions and opinions in the global scholarly works and literary frameworks, regarding the operations of the directors of different commercial companies and the different roles and responsibilities taken up by the same in the operational framework of the companies. Huczynski, Buchanan& Huczynski (2013), in this context, assert that, in most of the cases director or board of directors are appointed by the companies or the shareholders for the purpose of running the everyday operations and affairs of the companies. Ashkenas et al. (2015), in this context, highlight the fact, that the directors of the business organizations, especially in the contemporary period, are responsible for a number of crucial decision-making aspects and operations, which determine the fate of the organizations considerably. The primary roles and responsibilities of the directors of the business entities, in this context, as highlighted by Adams, Hermalin &Weisbach (2010), can be seen to be as follows:
- Establishing the mission, vision and the values of the companies, thereby setting the pace and nature of the operational frameworks, both current as well as for development of the organizations in the future (Calabrò &Mussolino, 2013)
- Setting up and reviewing the goals of the companies, thereby designing the company policies in different aspects
- To evaluate the presence as well as future opportunities, threats, strengths as well as inherent weaknesses of the operational frameworks of the companies, thereby analysing and exploring the best strategic options for the same and coordinating between different departments and employees of the organization for the purpose of comprehensive and successful implementations of the properly designed strategic and policy frameworks in the operational activities of the organizations, so as to increase the profitability and prosperity as well as the sustainability of the companies (Shropshire, 2010)
- The directors of the companies, as per the assertions of Frederick (2011), one of the primary responsibilities of the director or the board of directors of any company is that of delegation of authorities and responsibilities to the management of the companies and also to evaluate the implementation and efficiency of the business plans and strategies (Kylander& Stone, 2012)
- The directors of the companies are also accountable for the communication channels of the same with different shareholders as well as stakeholders of the companies, so as to keep the production and selling processes of the companies effectively running and the directors promote the reputation and goodwill of the companies (Valentine& Stewart,2013). This in turn, have considerable impacts on the reputation of the companies in the market and their prosperity and profitability (Brown& Guo, 2010)
Thus, from the above discussion, it becomes evident that the performance of any business organization, in any aspect, depends considerably the actions and activities of the directors of the organizations and how motivated they remain in dedicating all their efforts and ideas for the purpose of the development of the concerned organizations and their profitability and sustainability (Andrew. Keay, 2016).
There are several crucial factors, in the organizational frameworks, which motivate the directors and executives to give their best efforts for the development of their organizations. Some of the significant ones, in this context, are highlighted in the work of Burns, P. (2016), to be as follows:
Success of the company- As the author argues, one of the main motivational factors for the directors of the companies, is that of the overall success of the company, as the reputation of the director remains directly linked with the performance of the companies and if the companies perform well, it directly increases the welfare (monetary as well as non-monetary) of the directors (Hahn&Lasfer, 2011).
Personal success and benefits- According to Foster (2012), the directors also have personal reasons behind remaining motivated in giving efforts towards development of the organizations, which include their personal missions, success and incentives, which include both monetary and non-monetary incentives. Their wages and remunerations as well as monetary benefits, thus, act as crucial factors behind their motivations (Tjan, Harrington& Hsieh, 2012).
All these factors indicate towards the aspects of remuneration of the directors getting immense attention across the globe, as the same is perceived to be motivating the directors to work harder and more sincerely, which may have positive effects on the overall performance, prospects and sustainability of the concerned organizations.
As put forward by Jenter& Kanaan (2015), there remains a global notion among the population, in general, that the CEOs and the directors of the business companies, especially of the big and multinational ones, are extremely and extravagantly overpaid. There, however, remain, mixed perceptions regarding these remuneration structures. Kaplan& Minton (2012), assert that paying high remunerations to the directors of the companies can be a productive decision, if the same leads to motivation of the directors to put in more efforts and dedication to increase the growth and performance of the companies, but can be a negative strategy if over-payment of the directors does not improve the performance of the companies.
On the other hand, Sigler& Carolina (2011), in their elaborate and empirically evidenced research paper, based on the industrial domains of UK, USA, Australia and other countries, highlight that in most of the cases, the downfall of the companies as well as the poor performance of the same, for a prolonged time, is related to the extravagant and cumbersome expenditure structures of the companies, including those of the extreme over-payment of the remuneration of the CEOs (Fong, 2010).
Keeping this into consideration, it becomes important to analyse the needs of the high levels of remuneration of the directors and what implications the same bring for the companies, which can be seen to be less discussed in the existing literary frameworks and which the concerned research tries to take into consideration for analysis and interpretation.
The process of data collection refers to the measuring and gathering of the required information in an established systematic manner that would help in answering the stated test hypotheses, research questions, and evaluate the results (Smith, 2015). The primary objective of the data analysis in the given discussion is to examine the remuneration of the director. In addition to that in order analysis the performance of the business particularly the share price and the net profit is examined of the chosen ASX listed organisation (Mackey & Gass, 2015). The scope of this particular research, unlike other researches, is more specific and the chosen information is recent. The focus of the particular research is on the Top ASX listed Australian companies.
The process of sample selection is the process of choosing the data for the analysis. Due to time constraint the research is more focused on the accurate process of sampling. The ASX listed companies are chosen. Since, they comply with the standards, rules and codes of sound corporate governance (Flick, 2015). The one of the chosen factors in this research is share price, which is determined. Three ASX listed company chosen for the analysis are Woolworths limited, Wesfarmers limited and Telstra Corporation. The recent three annual reports are to be examined for the data.
The research variables of different scientific experiment or else research procedures are necessarily factors that can be manipulated and enumerated. Any specific factor can assume different values can be considered to be a scientific variable that can exert influence on experimental research (Mackey & Gass, 2015). Three different variables are considered for the current study. There are diverse quantifiable facets considered in this study. However, the study at hand focuses on investigation of director remuneration related to net profit and share price of firms. Net profit, level of remuneration and share price for three different firms for the period 2015 to 2017 are identified variables that are examined.
As suggested by Silverman (2016), independent variables indicate the fact that this is a mathematical variable that is essentially independent of different other variables in a specific expression or else function. Independent variable’s value can ascertain multiple values of varied variables. For the purpose of the present study, directors’ remuneration is considered as the independent variable.
Dependent variable refers to a specific variable in an experiment, whose value essentially relies upon independent variables. Fundamentally, this refers to a specific phenomenon that is altered by the impact of related factor otherwise known as the independent variable (Silverman, 2016). For the purpose of the current study, dependent variables of this study are the net profit as well as price of shares of firms that reflect overall performance of firms listed in the Australian Stock Exchange. The share price was selected from the annual financial report and the market index price of each end of the financial year and the net profit after tax was selected for the second dependent data.
The current research is essentially quantitative in nature. Essentially, quantitative research study refers to systematic empirical assessment of diverse observable phenomena namely, statistical, mathematical or else computational procedure. Descriptive statistics undertaken for the study are essentially utilized for the purpose of illustrating basic features/components of data. Essentially, descriptive statistics such as central tendency, dispersion and many others are taken into consideration. In essence, descriptive study presented in this study help in delivering a simple understanding regarding the amassed data. Also, inferential statistics taken into consideration for the study has used regression analysis. Particularly, regression analysis delivers understanding regarding information associated to both independent as well as dependent variable.
Woolworths Limited |
|||
Remuneration |
Net Profit |
Share Price |
|
Mean |
53950154.67 |
815066.6667 |
75339328 |
Median |
58508000 |
1534000 |
79081634 |
Standard Deviation |
42472583.68 |
1801416.391 |
23213530 |
Range |
84577536 |
3380800 |
45972354 |
Minimum |
9382464 |
-1234800 |
50481998 |
Maximum |
93960000 |
2146000 |
96454352 |
Sum |
161850464 |
2445200 |
226017984 |
Wesfarmers Limited |
|||
|
Remuneration |
Net Profit |
Share Price |
Mean |
2440790 |
1906666.667 |
55793243 |
Median |
2487660 |
2440000 |
52342257 |
Standard Deviation |
85495.95424 |
1316670.928 |
6550499 |
Range |
150492 |
2466000 |
11657969 |
Minimum |
2342109 |
407000 |
51689751 |
Maximum |
2492601 |
2873000 |
63347720 |
Sum |
7322370 |
5720000 |
167379728 |
Telstra Corporation limited |
|||
|
Remuneration |
Net profit |
Share price |
Mean |
15686087.67 |
463400000 |
5333333.3 |
Median |
15350387 |
423100000 |
5560000 |
Standard Deviation |
2075401.5 |
100691956 |
940708.95 |
Range |
4109876 |
188900000 |
1840000 |
Minimum |
13799000 |
389100000 |
4300000 |
Maximum |
17908876 |
578000000 |
6140000 |
Sum |
47058263 |
1390200000 |
16000000 |
Table 1: Presenting the descriptive statistics for variables for the three different firms
Based on the information presented in the above mentioned table, it can be hereby stated that for the firm Woolworths Limited, maximum remuneration level is recorded to be 93960000. Maximum net profit for the firm is 2146000 and maximum and maximum share price is 96454352. For the firm Woolworths Limited, average figures for remuneration for the firm stands at 53950154, mean net profit stands at 815066 while the mean share price stands at 75339328. The maximum remuneration figure for the firm Wesfarmers Limited stands at 2492601 that are relatively lower than that of Woolworths Limited and greater than that of Telstra Corporation Limited. Also, the mean remuneration, net profit and share price of the firm Wesfarmers are also said to be lower than that of Woolworths Limited.
Anova: Single Factor |
Net Profit |
|||||
SUMMARY |
||||||
Groups |
Count |
Sum |
Average |
Variance |
||
Net Profit (Woolworths Limited) |
3 |
2445200 |
815066.7 |
3.2451E+12 |
||
Net Profit (Wesfarmers Limited) |
3 |
5720000 |
1906667 |
1.73362E+12 |
||
Net profit (Telstra Corporation limited) |
3 |
1.39E+09 |
4.63E+08 |
1.01389E+16 |
||
ANOVA |
||||||
Source of Variation |
SS |
df |
MS |
F |
P-value |
F crit |
Between Groups |
4.27E+17 |
2 |
2.13E+17 |
63.13611142 |
9.33357E-05 |
5.143253 |
Within Groups |
2.03E+16 |
6 |
3.38E+15 |
|||
Total |
4.47E+17 |
8 |
||||
Anova: Single Factor |
Share Price |
|||||
SUMMARY |
||||||
Groups |
Count |
Sum |
Average |
Variance |
||
Share Price (Woolworths Limited) |
3 |
2.26E+08 |
75339328 |
5.38868E+14 |
||
Share Price (Wesfarmers Limited) |
3 |
1.67E+08 |
55793243 |
4.2909E+13 |
||
Share price (Telstra Corporation limited) |
3 |
16000000 |
5333333 |
8.84933E+11 |
||
ANOVA |
||||||
Source of Variation |
SS |
df |
MS |
F |
P-value |
F crit |
Between Groups |
7.83E+15 |
2 |
3.91E+15 |
20.15514641 |
0.002174809 |
5.143253 |
Within Groups |
1.17E+15 |
6 |
1.94E+14 |
|||
Total |
8.99E+15 |
8 |
||||
Anova: Single Factor |
||||||
SUMMARY |
||||||
Groups |
Count |
Sum |
Average |
Variance |
||
Remuneration (Woolworths Limited) |
3 |
1.62E+08 |
53950155 |
1.80392E+15 |
||
Remuneration (Wesfarmers Limited) |
3 |
7322370 |
2440790 |
7309558191 |
||
Remuneration (Telstra Corporation limited) |
3 |
47058263 |
15686088 |
4.30729E+12 |
||
ANOVA |
||||||
Source of Variation |
SS |
df |
MS |
F |
P-value |
F crit |
Between Groups |
4.29E+15 |
2 |
2.15E+15 |
3.561034487 |
0.095597559 |
5.143253 |
Within Groups |
3.62E+15 |
6 |
6.03E+14 |
|||
Total |
7.91E+15 |
8 |
||||
Table 2: ANNOVA analysis
For the purpose of the current study, Analysis of Variance (also known as ANNOVA) can be considered to be a collection of diverse statistical models and their related estimation processes (namely, variation among as well as between different groups). This is carried out to evaluate variances among specific group means in a specific sample. ANNOVA can be regarded to be a collection of statistical model designed for analysing difference between different groups such as net profit for the three different firms, share price for three different firms and remuneration for three different firms. In ANNOVA, there is a significance level (reflected as alpha) of essentially 0.05. In case if the p –value is higher than the mentioned significance level, then there exists no adequate evidence or substantiation to reject the mentioned null hypothesis.
For the group “net profit” of the firms, the p value is recorded to be 0.00009. Therefore, p value is said to be lower than that of (p value=0.05), the null hypothesis can be rejected in favour of different alternative hypothesis. Therefore, null hypothesis that indicates that there exists no considerable variation between the said populations is rejected. Thus, it can be concluded that there exists substantial difference between net profits of the corporation.
For the group “share price” of the firms, the p-value is registered to be 0.002. It can be hereby observed that p value of the firm is lower than 0.05. Therefore, null hypothesis that refers to the fact that there subsists no relative difference between the specific populations is rejected. Therefore, it can be hereby inferred that exists substantial variation between share prices of the three different firms taken into consideration.
For the group “remuneration” of the firms, p-value is recorded to be 0.095. Essentially, it can be mentioned that p value of the corporation is greater than 0.05. Thus, we fail to accept the null hypothesis that mentions that presents no relative variance between the specific population.
Woolworths Limited |
|
Correlation |
Remuneration |
Remuneration |
1 |
Net Profit |
-0.260716033 |
Share Price |
-0.972945448 |
Wesfarmers Limited |
|
Correlation |
Remuneration |
Remuneration |
1 |
Net Profit |
-0.377707314 |
Share Price |
-0.999781053 |
Telstra Corporation limited |
|
Correlation |
Remuneration |
Remuneration |
1 |
Net profit |
-0.672076552 |
Share price |
0.43849749 |
Table 3: Correlation Coefficient Analysis
The table shows enumeration of correlation between remuneration, share price and net profit. Based on calculations presented above, it can be hereby mentioned that there exists negative correlation between net profit and remuneration and share price and remuneration for the firm Woolworths Limited. This shows that increase in remuneration leads to decrease in net profit as well as share price of the corporation Woolworths Limited.
The table above mentions above shows that there exists negative association between net profit and share price with remuneration of the firm Wesfarmers Limited. Similarly, this reflects enhancement in remuneration directs towards decrease in both net profit as well as price of shares. For the firm Telstra Corporation, it can be observed that there exists negative association between net profit and remuneration. Again, there exists positive association between remuneration and share price, while, there subsists negative association between net profit and remuneration.
The current segment of the research paper presents a comparison to prior studies. Particularly, the current research has attempted to find an association with net profit as well as prices of shares of firms with the level of remuneration of important management personnel of the firms (Frederick, 2011).
The outcome of the research study reflects that there exists negative correlation between net profit and remuneration of the firm for the firm Woolworths Limited. Again, for the firm Wesfarmers Limited as well, negative correlation can be discovered between net profit and remuneration of the firm. In addition to this, there exists a negative association between net profit and remuneration of the firm of the firm Telstra Corporation Limited.
The results of the study represents that there subsists a negative association between share price and remuneration of the firm Woolworths Limited. In addition to this, negative correlation can be discovered between share price and remuneration of the firm for the firm Wesfarmers Limited. Further, similarly positive relationship can be found between share price and remuneration of the firm Telstra Corporation Limited.
One of the most important limitations of the study is overall size of the sample. Prior studies were conducted on over and above 100 business concerns. However, the sample for the current research was based on three ASX listed corporations in the top 20 list. The only three firms are selected for the study. The small size of the samples present
In essence, ASX 20 corporations are regarded to be superior to other listed corporations. It can be hereby stated that verities of firm population could probably have presented a diverse image (Foster, 2012). However, another disadvantage was the financial period was limited to 3 years. Particularly, a long term of alteration in the specific system can deliver a perfect view of circumstances of the business corporation.
Conclusion and Recommendations
Based on analysis of the present study, it can be hereby mentioned that there exists significant variance between net profits as well as price of shares of selected firms. However, level of remuneration is said to be somewhat similar and exists no significant difference between the same among the selected groups. Results of the correlation analysis reflects the fact that there exists negative association (that is to say, inverse relationship) between net profit and share prices of firms with level of remuneration for the firms Woolworths limited and Wesfarmers Limited. However, based on amassed data on Telstra Corporation limited, it can be hereby stated that there exists a positive association although not very strong between price of shares and remuneration. Thus, it can be hereby inferred that level of remuneration exerts adverse influences on overall profitability of firms in general.
The current study has attempted to establish association between remuneration of director and firm’s net profit and price of shares. Nevertheless, a greater sample size for financial data evaluation could have made the outcome more strong and at the same time accurate. In addition to this, there are diverse other facets counting different external uncontrollable facets need to be considered whilst carrying out the study. Essentially, there are different uncontrollable factors that are expected to balance unusual alterations in then sample collection data. Undertaking further research on greater sample and with more number of financial year backgrounds shall deliver a superior outcome.
References
Flick, U. (2015). Introducing research methodology: A beginner’s guide to doing a research project. Sage.
Mackey, A., & Gass, S. M. (2015). Second language research: Methodology and design. Routledge.
Silverman, D. (Ed.). (2016). Qualitative research. Sage.
Smith, J. A. (Ed.). (2015). Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods. Sage.
References
Adams, R. B., Hermalin, B. E., &Weisbach, M. S. (2010). The role of boards of directors in corporate governance: A conceptual framework and survey. Journal of economic literature, 48(1), 58-107. Retrieved from: https://cloudfront.escholarship.org/dist/prd/content/qt3287q5sk/qt3287q5sk.pdf
ANDREW. KEAY, L. L. B. (2016). DIRECTORS’DUTIES. JORDAN PUBLISHING Limited. Retrieved from: https://store.lexisnexis.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/494969/Directors-Duties-Contents.pdf
Ashkenas, R., Ulrich, D., Jick, T., & Kerr, S. (2015). The boundaryless organization: Breaking the chains of organizational structure. John Wiley & Sons.
Brown, W. A., & Guo, C. (2010). Exploring the key roles for nonprofit boards. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 39(3), 536-546. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/William_Brown27/publication/265446450_Exploring_the_Key_Roles_for_Nonprofit_Boards/links/56b35bcc08ae75a092d00583.pdf
Burns, P. (2016). Entrepreneurship and small business. Palgrave Macmillan Limited. Retrieved from: https://edf-vec.org/gen/html/azl/kitabxana/62.pdf
Calabrò, A., &Mussolino, D. (2013). How do boards of directors contribute to family SME export intensity? The role of formal and informal governance mechanisms. Journal of Management & Governance, 17(2), 363-403. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Andrea_Calabro/publication/225201586_How_Do_Boards_of_Directors_Contribute_to_Family_SME_Export_Intensity_The_Role_of_Formal_and_Informal_Governance_Mechanisms/links/0c960516dd56a4a437000000/How-Do-Boards-of-Directors-Contribute-to-Family-SME-Export-Intensity-The-Role-of-Formal-and-Informal-Governance-Mechanisms.pdf
Fong, E. A. (2010). CEO pay fairness as a predictor of stakeholder management. Journal of Business Research, 63(4), 404-410. Retrieved from: https://cas.uah.edu/fonge/Published%20and%20Forthcoming%20Manuscripts/Fong%20JBR%20In%20press.pdf
Foster, R. J. (2012). Big men and business: morality, debt and the corporation A perspective by Robert J. Foster. Social anthropology, 20(4), 486-490.
Frederick, W. R. (2011). Enhancing the role of the boards of directors of state-owned enterprises. Retrieved from: https://observgo.uquebec.ca/observgo/fichiers/53123_ep.pdf
Hahn, P. D., &Lasfer, M. (2011). The compensation of non-executive directors: rationale, form, and findings. Journal of Management & Governance, 15(4), 589-601. Retrieved from: https://scholar.google.co.in/scholar?start=20&q=what+motivates+the+directors+of+businesses+&hl=en&as_sdt=1,5&as_ylo=2010&as_yhi=2018&as_vis=1#d=gs_cit&p=&u=%2Fscholar%3Fq%3Dinfo%3ACf2bkf-3m6QJ%3Ascholar.google.com%2F%26output%3Dcite%26scirp%3D21%26hl%3Den
Huczynski, A., Buchanan, D. A., & Huczynski, A. A. (2013). Organizational behaviour (p. 82). London: Pearson. Retrieved from: https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.473.7000&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Jenter, D., & Kanaan, F. (2015). CEO turnover and relative performance evaluation. The Journal of Finance, 70(5), 2155-2184. Retrieved from: https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/64421/1/__lse.ac.uk_storage_LIBRARY_Secondary_libfile_shared_repository_Content_Jenter%2C%20D_CEO%20turnover_Jenter_CEO%20turnover_2015.pdf
Kaplan, S. N., & Minton, B. A. (2012). How has CEO turnover changed?. International review of Finance, 12(1), 57-87. Retrieved from: https://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/steven.kaplan/research/km.pdf
Kylander, N., & Stone, C. (2012). The role of brand in the nonprofit sector. Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10(2), 35-41. Retrieved from: https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/36953805/The_role_of_brand_in_the_nonprofit_sector.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1538566777&Signature=aNSHsKSy5vUAw24OzlPSzr7cTXQ%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DThe_Role_of_Brand_in_the_Nonprofit_Secto.pdf
Shropshire, C. (2010). The role of the interlocking director and board receptivity in the diffusion of practices. Academy of Management Review, 35(2), 246-264. Retrieved from: https://media.terry.uga.edu/socrates/publications/2013/06/Shropshire_AMR.pdf
Sigler, K. J., & Carolina, N. (2011). CEO compensation and company performance. Business and Economics Journal, 31(1), 1-8. Retrieved from: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/64c6/b239ff0d606a51481737dcd816bef058f89b.pdf
Tjan, A. K., Harrington, R. J., & Hsieh, T. Y. (2012). Heart, smarts, guts, and luck: What it takes to be an entrepreneur and build a great business. Harvard Business Press.
Valentine, E. L., & Stewart, G. (2013). The emerging role of the board of directors in enterprise business technology governance. International Journal of Disclosure and Governance, 10(4), 346-362. Retrieved from: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/59162/1/Valentine_Stewart_RoleofEBTG__Final_17-04-13.pdf